RE: The Precarity of Anarchy: A Reason to Doubt
I totally agree that it would be impossible to enact anarchy without forcing all others with differing political philosophies to accept it. This act of force in itself breaks core anarchist principles of liberty and autonomy of the individual.
I disagree that the measure of a just and therefore better society is in the amount of suffering. Suffering can be an extremely subjective term. If we are talking purely bodily suffering, then the most just society would control everyone's diet, lifestyle, and remove human autonomy for the sake of the greater good. If we are speaking of emotional and psychological suffering as well, then we are in a very subjective realm of the human psyche, and all objective measures become near impossible.
I also think by reducing infant death, extending life spans, and removing subsistence lifestyles, we create global problems of over population and environmental destruction. The mechanisms that are often meant to reduce suffering, end up creating more in unpredictable ways. I don't think there has been a time in modern society where we aren't dealing with incredible suffering from things that were meant to reduce it just decades ago. In 30-60 years I'm certain we'll be dealing with a terrible aftermath of many of our industrial methods and medical procedures. But I digress.
To me, the measure of a just society is in the autonomy of the individual, in so far as another individual's autonomy is not put in jeopardy by the will of the other. This is something that is easier to measure objectively. I think when free, communities can work what suffering and happiness means to themselves, and create ways to achieve that.
With that said, I am only a humble minnow, in life and on Steem. I really enjoy your writing and the wealth of knowledge you are sharing freely here. These are only my thoughts, and I'm sure there are those much more educated than I that can debunk every word. Cheers!
The flipside of negative liberty (autonomy) is positive liberty. You are not free if you happen to be too poor to exercise your liberty. Under pure free markets, the masses have starvation wages and miserable working conditions. It is government regulations that made "laissez-faire" bearable by mandating minimum safety requirements, minimum wages, and certain rules against air pollution. America would be a hell-hole without OSHA and the EPA. Infringements upon negative liberty are sometimes necessary to ensure a bit of positive liberty. You aren't free to go for a jog if you have to work 20 hours a day or if smog makes it unsafe to breath outside without a mask. I would contend, also, that liberty/autonomy is just as subjective.
Suffering can be measured though. There are metrics for measuring human happiness. You can ask people on censuses. You can look at the rates of depression and addiction in various countries. According to all the metrics, people are happier under social democracy than under more laissez-faire systems. (Cf. World Happiness Report)
As for the overpopulation stuff, that's just Malthusian fear-mongering. Don't let them trick you. The world is nowhere near overpopulated. Most of the world's land is neither occupied nor used for agriculture. Cities are overpopulated. Why? Because we have a system of wage-slavery so people have to flock to where the jobs are. If we abolished wage-slavery by adopting a universal basic income, funded via land value tax, people would no longer have to flock to where the best-paying jobs are. People would spread out more and live in smaller communities. Also, it would stimullate technological and scientific progress, so we might even be able to reach the singularity and enter into a transhumanist era. In which case it may be feasible to break free from this planet and establish an interstellar civilization.
I agree that free markets limit individual liberty. Because of the nature of the corporation and hiarchies inherent in production based society, those at the top have greater liberty than those at the bottom. But this itself is a violation of using your will to impede another’s. I think our entire society is structured poorly, and I wouldn’t advocate for the removal of government or its regulatory bodies in our current culture and context. I believe the best way forward is through heavy regulation on corporations. In fact, I think corporate personhood should be revoked. Worker owned businesses should replace the modern corporation and slowly corporate power reduced to nothing. Once the corporation has been dissolved, I think we can then discuss the necessity of centralized and violent government.
The population issue is not a myth or scare. I did the math on one of my posts a while back. As it stands, we are perfectly ok, and can double in population if we replace animal meats with insects or hemp. But this is not what I’m especially concerned about. High population densities create epidemics and degrade the environment. Even rural America can have populations too high for sustainability without proper care for the land and respect for nature.
I think technology will lean towards creating a dystopian future, rather than a utopia. I tend to think it’s likely humanity will be wiped out before we can colonize other planets. But that’s all guess work.
I can see, overall, we envision a similar future of decentralized populations that can live freeely and happily without cohersion or force. I’m going on somewhat of a vision quest to imagine/invent an ideal society and work my way backwards of how we can get there from here. I believe this to be a healthy practice for any individual. Thanks for your insight and reply.
I wish more people would realize this: "But this itself is a violation of using your will to impede another’s."
There's also so much food waste. If society becomes more equal, society becomes less consumeristic, and society becomes less wasteful, farmers are rewarded better for their labor, small housing take root (rather than the urban sprawl of giant lawns and giant houses), etc, we could allow many more people to live comfortably. Still, there is a limit.
Interestingly, people do tend to give birth to fewer children if they get out of poverty, and after they go through advanced education.
I'm starting to feel like I'm stalking you. Been reading your resteems today and thoroughly enjoying them. The world of quality Steemit content just opened wide.
Lol! No worries. That’s how you find good writers and community on Steemit, stalk people that are interesting and find people even more interesting. Glad I can be of service 👍🏼